Ferrari SF23

[gordonthegun]

An interesting close-up of the new sidepod, where we can see how the air outlet around the exhaust pipe can also act as an airflow conditioner (downwashing):

[ing.]

Interesting discussion on the benefits of a large undercut, including how SF-23 implemented this:

https://www.autosport.com/f1/news/the-m ... /10482217/

[dialtone]

Interesting discussion on the benefits of a large undercut, including how SF-23 implemented this:

https://www.autosport.com/f1/news/the-m ... /10482217/

I’m having trouble connecting the title with what Stella says. To direct question Stella says: not so much downwash, more like wide sidepod.

Ferrari has had wide sidepods forever, it’s not really a change in phylosophy and when it comes to the rear even the article has to admit that it’s still inwash.

Like Clear says, Ferrari is taking inspiration from other cars and testing in their tunnel but it’s a stretch, even for this article, to say they are going downwash or shifting concept.

[Vanja #66]

Like Clear says, Ferrari is taking inspiration from other cars and testing in their tunnel but it’s a stretch, even for this article, to say they are going downwash or shifting concept.

Pundits see a shape and they know right away what the flow does, even if the flow vis suggests something completely different (but hey, who cares about actual visualised flow!), or in Ferrari's case - very similar to how it was before, ie still inwashing sidepods.

[ing.]

Like Clear says, Ferrari is taking inspiration from other cars and testing in their tunnel but it’s a stretch, even for this article, to say they are going downwash or shifting concept.

Pundits see a shape and they know right away what the flow does, even if the flow vis suggests something completely different (but hey, who cares about actual visualised flow!), or in Ferrari's case - very similar to how it was before, ie still inwashing sidepods.

The pundit mentions that the Ferrari is still in-washing, BTW. Must have read your analysis is my guess.

Hard to know if this is the case because they couldn’t fully realize a down-washing design and shelf cooling within the cost cap, or if they’re still going their own way (in-washing) on this.

They obviously saw benefits in deepening the undercut, though, if they did so.

[ing.]

Interesting discussion on the benefits of a large undercut, including how SF-23 implemented this:

https://www.autosport.com/f1/news/the-m ... /10482217/

I’m having trouble connecting the title with what Stella says. To direct question Stella says: not so much downwash, more like wide sidepod.

Ferrari has had wide sidepods forever, it’s not really a change in phylosophy and when it comes to the rear even the article has to admit that it’s still inwash.

Like Clear says, Ferrari is taking inspiration from other cars and testing in their tunnel but it’s a stretch, even for this article, to say they are going downwash or shifting concept.

Curious quote that by Stella. Possibly referring to the sidepods staying wide at the bottom of the ramp (at the back) versus a Coke-bottle shape.

[Farnborough]

Like Clear says, Ferrari is taking inspiration from other cars and testing in their tunnel but it’s a stretch, even for this article, to say they are going downwash or shifting concept.

Pundits see a shape and they know right away what the flow does, even if the flow vis suggests something completely different (but hey, who cares about actual visualised flow!), or in Ferrari's case - very similar to how it was before, ie still inwashing sidepods.

The pundit mentions that the Ferrari is still in-washing, BTW. Must have read your analysis is my guess.

Hard to know if this is the case because they couldn’t fully realize a down-washing design and shelf cooling within the cost cap, or if they’re still going their own way (in-washing) on this.

They obviously saw benefits in deepening the undercut, though, if they did so.

Yes to inwash predominately still..."Meanwhile, the sunken bodywork that formed the bathtub on the outgoing solution has been transformed into more of a gulley and feeds airflow into the new downwash section. However, it's worth noting that Ferrari has fallen short of widening the bodywork here and is still broadly following the in-wash philosophy it previously employed."..... from that autosport article.

[FDD]

Like Clear says, Ferrari is taking inspiration from other cars and testing in their tunnel but it’s a stretch, even for this article, to say they are going downwash or shifting concept.

Pundits see a shape and they know right away what the flow does, even if the flow vis suggests something completely different (but hey, who cares about actual visualised flow!), or in Ferrari's case - very similar to how it was before, ie still inwashing sidepods.

Crystal clear

[jambuka]

Front wing with only 2 flaps by Ferrari for Canada. Very interesting !! I thought they wanted a more loaded FW.

[dialtone]

That’s not fully assembled

[AR3-GP]

That’s not fully assembled

That will NOT help with the understeer

[dialtone]

That’s not fully assembled

That will NOT help with the understeer

Not with that attitude


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Ozan]

that's monza front wing

[Andi76]

Interesting discussion on the benefits of a large undercut, including how SF-23 implemented this:

https://www.autosport.com/f1/news/the-m ... /10482217/

I’m having trouble connecting the title with what Stella says. To direct question Stella says: not so much downwash, more like wide sidepod.

Ferrari has had wide sidepods forever, it’s not really a change in phylosophy and when it comes to the rear even the article has to admit that it’s still inwash.

Like Clear says, Ferrari is taking inspiration from other cars and testing in their tunnel but it’s a stretch, even for this article, to say they are going downwash or shifting concept.

I feel the same way. Above all, some of what he writes doesn't necessarily make much sense. I don't think he really understood what Stella wanted to tell him...

[Vanja #66]

The pundit mentions that the Ferrari is still in-washing, BTW. Must have read your analysis is my guess.

Hard to know if this is the case because they couldn’t fully realize a down-washing design and shelf cooling within the cost cap, or if they’re still going their own way (in-washing) on this.

They obviously saw benefits in deepening the undercut, though, if they did so.

Tbh, I only reacted to dialtone's post at the time, didn't really look at the article, so that's on me

Downwash-only sides are much different in terms of flow management, as is the big shelf cooling, than what Ferrari started with F1-75 and especially vs luanch-SF-23. It's not just the cost cap, you need to reset every surface and start figuring out all the details of flow management, tyre squirt, yaw/pitch/roll behaviour etc and that takes a lot of time. It doesn't matter how many man-hours you put into it, you can't cut corners while you re-learn the aero philosophy of another concept.

Bigger undercut is likely connected with floor-edge philosophy, and should also cut a bit of drag on its own. Although we need to see what's going on with top-speed with the same RW design like last year first, before we draw any definitive drag conclusions about this new configuration, which should be possible now in Canada.